What happened to Concord? Why did a big Sony first-party game get sent out to die immediately? Is it actually selling badly, or are we just reading the numbers wrong? As usual when questions of this nature crop up, I asked a bunch of professional industry analysts to explain it to me.
Yeah, I bet that nobody buying a game that they know nothing about is caused by it’s diverse cast. It has nothing to do with it being an Overwatch rip-off with terrible marketing.
Thanks for clarifying, looks like they are coming up with acronyms in their echo chamber.
DEI has at least some roots in holding a positive connotation, a lot of companies that value an image/brand of diversity will have a DEI department/team. It’s not just an acronym they made up, though it’s definitely been co-opted by reactionaries as a way to describe someone they feel only got the job/promotion/attention because of a compulsion to raise up minority voices (a “DEI” hire is their way of saying the person wasn’t qualified for the job, but got it because they were black/a woman".
My initial take on the rant was to simply ignore it, but now I’m wondering if there’s maybe something to the idea that specifically in the shooter genre, the market is different enough that I don’t really know the space. Like BG3 was about as DEI a game as you could get, and no one’s arguing that game’s success. But I do know a couple conservatives that were specifically kind of turned off by games like cyberpunk and BG3. Apparently they couldn’t handle tasteful sidedick. Maybe for a shooter to be successful it’s got to coddle what the gun enthusiast crowd is demanding? I don’t know. Despite their popularity, I just don’t play that many shooters.
I don’t think it’s that deep. Deadlock, the game they mention in their rant, also has a pretty diverse roster. I think Concord just looks very generic both in gameplay and in character designs.
Basically. DEI (Diversity,
EthicsEquity, and Inclusion, IIRC?) is the new “woke”/SJW bogey.Having an woman (with exposed skin, no less!) is causing all entertainment to be ruined forever, etc etc, that kind of thing.
EDIT: Equity, not ethics, whoops! Thanks for the correction.
Yeah, I bet that nobody buying a game that they know nothing about is caused by it’s diverse cast. It has nothing to do with it being an Overwatch rip-off with terrible marketing.
Thanks for clarifying, looks like they are coming up with acronyms in their echo chamber.
DEI has at least some roots in holding a positive connotation, a lot of companies that value an image/brand of diversity will have a DEI department/team. It’s not just an acronym they made up, though it’s definitely been co-opted by reactionaries as a way to describe someone they feel only got the job/promotion/attention because of a compulsion to raise up minority voices (a “DEI” hire is their way of saying the person wasn’t qualified for the job, but got it because they were black/a woman".
My initial take on the rant was to simply ignore it, but now I’m wondering if there’s maybe something to the idea that specifically in the shooter genre, the market is different enough that I don’t really know the space. Like BG3 was about as DEI a game as you could get, and no one’s arguing that game’s success. But I do know a couple conservatives that were specifically kind of turned off by games like cyberpunk and BG3. Apparently they couldn’t handle tasteful sidedick. Maybe for a shooter to be successful it’s got to coddle what the gun enthusiast crowd is demanding? I don’t know. Despite their popularity, I just don’t play that many shooters.
I don’t think it’s that deep. Deadlock, the game they mention in their rant, also has a pretty diverse roster. I think Concord just looks very generic both in gameplay and in character designs.
It’s equity, not ethics.